Law enforcement officers watch during a protest on West Florissant Avenue in Ferguson on Aug. 18.Photo: Getty Images

Multiple witnesses in riot-torn Ferguson, Mo., said that the unarmed black teen killed by a white cop attacked the officer in his patrol car before the teen was shot, according to a new report.

“Police sources tell me more than a dozen witnesses have corroborated cop’s version of events in shooting,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch crime reporter Christine Byers tweeted, without elaborating.

Officer Darren Wilson has not spoken publicly about the Aug. 9 shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown shortly after Brown and a pal allegedly stole a $50 box of cigars in a strong-arm robbery at a convenience store.

But two friends have come forward to defend him — with one describing his version of events leading up to the killing.

A man who said he played hockey with the 28-year cop said on “Good Morning America” Tuesday that Wilson was a “really quiet, well-mannered, respectful guy” who showed no signs of violence.

Earlier, another friend who identified herself only as Josie called “The Dana Show” on radio station KFTK to say that Wilson told her the tall, burly Brown, 18, had “bum-rushed“ him before the shooting.

Josie — who said she heard the version from Wilson’s girlfriend — said the cop encountered Brown and his pal Dorian Johnson walking down the middle of a street, pulled up and ordered them onto the sidewalk.

Wilson then noticed the pair were carrying cigars, and had heard the report of the robbery and recognized the pair as possible suspects.

“And he’s looking at them and they got something in their hands and it looks like it could be what, you know, those cigars or whatever. So he goes in reverse back to them,” Josie said.

Wilson, she said, “tries to get out of his car. They slam his door shut violently. I think he said Michael did. And then he opened the car again. He tried to get out. He stands up.

“And then Michael just bum-rushes him and shoves him back into his car. Punches him in the face and then Darren grabs for his gun. Michael grabbed for the gun. At one point he got the gun entirely turned against his hip. And he shoves it away. And the gun goes off,” Josie said.

“Well, then Michael takes off and gets to be about 35 feet away. And Darren’s first protocol is to pursue. So he stands up and yells, ‘Freeze!’ Michael and his friend turn around. And Michael taunts him … And then all the sudden he just started bum-rushing him. He just started coming at him full speed,” she told the station.

“So [Wilson] really thinks [Brown] was on something, because he just kept coming. It was unbelievable. And so he finally ended up, the final shot was in the forehead, and then he fell about two to three feet in front of the officer,” she said.

An autopsy performed by the St. Louis County medical examiner determined Brown had marijuana in his system when he was shot.

But NBC News reported that 78 people had been taken into custody, citing arrest records.

State Highway Patrol Capt. Ron Johnson said at least one person from New York and another from California were among those busted, though cops on Tuesday provided no further details.

Two people were shot, though police were not involved.

“Our officers came under heavy fire. Not a single bullet was fired by officers,” Johnson during a news conference at 2:30 a.m. Tuesday.

But cops did fire multiple canisters of tear gas to disperse the rioters and prevent further looting.

“This nation is watching each and every one of us,” said Johnson, who was clearly angry during the news conference, The Post-Dispatch reported. “I am not going to let the criminals that have come here from across this country, or live in this neighborhood, define this community.”

Michelle Obama warned readers in an an op-ed for The New York Times on Wednesday that, “Right now, the House of Representatives is considering a bill to override science by mandating that white potatoes be included on the list of foods that women can purchase using WIC dollars. Now, there is nothing wrong with potatoes. The problem is that many women and children already consume enough potatoes and not enough of the nutrient-dense fruits and vegetables they need.”

So much for being pro-choice. But isn’t that such a fun phrase, “override science”? Both in its predictable use and its lack of sensible meaning. You can’t override science, so why is she claiming a House bill does so? You can override “scientific consensus,” which is itself an unscientific idea, but not science. It’s a nice, frightening buzz-phrase, though, logic be damned.

If you disagree with a Democrat, you hate science. You also hate children, hate women, hate clean water (personally, muddy drinking water is my favorite), hate nature (yay, litter!), hate Earth, hate non-whites and non-straights, hate the elderly, and hate children with Down’s Syndrome. There’s no arguing with Democrats. If you disagree with them, there is no possibility for civil discourse. You are simply labeled a hater and a cretin, and that gives the Democrats a good enough excuse not to engage in civil discourse or debate with you. “I don’t need to justify myself to a hate-monger.” It’s really convenient, being a Democrat.

So Republicans want to override science, Michelle tells us, because they want to allow women who are receiving Women, Infants and Children (WIC) assistance the choice to purchase white potatoes. This is like saying that if I have a sweet potato and I have a white potato, and I tell a woman, “Here, take either one,” I am overriding science. Giving someone the option to buy white potatoes is anti-science, according to Michelle; science, she believes, does not allow room for freedom of spud choice.

A Missouri-based gun manufacturer announced this week that it will release a line of “New York Compliant” rifles, a market-based response to the Empire State’s strict new gun laws.

“With the continual trampling of the 2nd Amendment in New York, Black Rain Ordnance is proud to announce their ‘New York Compliant’ rifles,” the group said in a statement on its website. “These rifles feature all of the quality and craftsmanship of the standard BRO-lines, but with the added features that allow for legal possession.”

And if Black Rain’s move to create rifles that comply with New York’s new guns laws, which have been described as some of the “nation’s toughest,” sounds familiar, it should: They’re not the only company to move in this direction, and stories of such guns have been popping up since May 2013.

In fact, several New York-based gun shops have, for example, offered to replace the grip on non-complaint rifles so that they’re square with state’s laws.

“The modified gun still fires at the same rate and with the same power; the shooter just holds it slightly differently,” the Guardian reported. “These modified weapons do not have to be registered with the state.”

One gun maker in Rochester, N.Y., Just Right Carbines, manufactures modified semi-automatic rifles that comply with the New York’s Safe Act, which was signed into law by Gov. Andrew Cuomo in January 2013.

Just Right Carbines’ general manger, Anthony Testa, told the Guardian that New York authorities signed off on the modified rifles, telling him that his products complied with the law.

The Safe Act, which was the result of the 2012 mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., that claimed the life of 27 people, bans the sale of so-called “assault weapons” and requires that everyone who already owns a rifle categorized as such to register them with the state by 15 April 2014.

“Bat-gwai” is the Cantonese for “white ghost;” or as we more commonly hear it translated, “white devil.” It may be worth noting that white is the color of death and mourning in China, as black is in Europe and America.

Enslaved African-Americans told tales to their children of a Boogie Man who would abduct you, kill you or otherwise cause harm to you if you were to leave the plantation. The Boogie man of which they spoke was in essence the white man. (Possible connection tot the ghost like appearance of the KKK)

From TV show “The Brady Bunch,” especially used to make the point that whites are acting “uncool.” A variation is to refer to someone by the names of one of the Brady Bunch children,i.e., Peter, Marsha, etc.

Term probably comes from the briar bushes found in Appalachian states. Variant: briar-hopper. Applied locally to redneck Kentucky native or other southerner from Appalachia who resettled in Southwestern Ohio during or after WWII in search of factory jobs.

Many people in the southern U.S. supported the confederacy in the Civil War, and still display their support with confederate flags. Increasingly being used by the media to denote KKK members who sometimes display the Confederate Battle Flag. The KKK is condemned by most “Confederate” organizations.

This term is said to have originated in England before the 16th century, refering to the lower class whose diet primarily consisted of “crackers”, actually biscuits. Many of their descendants were sent to the Georgia penal colony, hence “Georgia crackers.” White people had invented this name for themselves before the first slave was brought to America, although it is still in use today by mostly older blacks referring to whites. Was probably redefined in the days of American slavery by the slavemaster’s “Crack” of the whip.

Hebrew Israelites refer to whites as being the actual color of “red”. A white person laughs, gets angry, slapped, and cries, will turn red. Also, being the direct lineage of Easu as oppose to Blacks and American Indians being the lineage of Jacob according to Genenis chp.25 vers 25 and Genesis chp. 36. Doing research of the Roman Empire, you will find that the Romans were known as the Edomites. King Herod was an Edomite and before Rome was known as Rome, it was known as the city of Edom.

From the Thai word for French (farangsayt) who were among the first to colonize Southeast Asia. Generally non-derogatory, though depends on context and intention of speaker. Applies to people of non-Thai origin.

Japanese equivalent to “Goyim,” refers to anyone not Japanese, but especially Westerners. Actually is a shortened version of “Gai-koku-jin” (literally “outside-country-person,” the NICE way to say “foreigner.”) “Gai-Ko,” depending on how it’s written in Japanese, can mean “diplomacy” (outside-mingle,) “extroversion” (outside-facing,) “outer harbor” or a Japanese name in which “ko” means “happiness”

This is truly only derogatory in regions of northern Mexico and in the United States where it translates to “white foreigner.” Gringo in many other countries in Latin America really only translates as “foreigner” without a pejorative connotation. Is generally used to refer to all foreigners/tourists of apparently northern European descent. Some say it comes from Spanish “griego” (meaning Greek) which used to be used to refer to anything foreign. Others say it comes from hearing Americans sing the popular song “Green Grow the Rushes” (unlikely though). Yet others believe it comes from when soldiers were in South America and they all wore green outfits, and they would say, “Green Go.” Gringa for females.

Cantonese term to refer to any Western person. Translates to ‘White ghost’ or ‘White devil’. The first whites seen in China were sailors. The ships often left on early morning tides or during the night, causing the locals to believe they were “ghosts” who were seen and then disappeared.

Hawaiian: Haole is a contraction of ha (breath) and a’ole (no) meaning “no breath” used to described foreigners who shook hands instead of greeting nose to nose like the Hawaiians. Almost exclusively used as a derogatory word for whites after the U.S. armed takeover of the Hawaiian Monarchy.

Possibly comes from the term “Honky Tonk”, which is a type of country music. Another interesting theory suggests it originated as “Hunky” (and “Bohunk”) to refer to Slavic and Hungarian immigrants and eventually transformed into “Honkey” to refer to all White people. Might also come from the African Wolof word “Honq” meaning red or pink and used to describe white men. Yet another theory has it originating from white men honking their horns to call on the lounge singer/prostitute types in 1920’s Harlem.

This is kind of an interesting term, because “Ebony” is considered a very good word and used by Blacks to reference themselves (some even name their children “Ebony”). However, you’ll probably never see a White person naming their kid “Ivory”, and a magazine named “Ivory” solely concerning White fashion, beauty, and Superstars will never be made.

Literally meaning “Ghost person/guy”. In Cantonese, it’s “guih lo”. Somewhat popular…used to refer to the presence of British people (whites) when China and Britan were at war, towards the end of the 19th century, and the beginning of the 20th. Can be insulting if said the right way

Used by white people to describe other white people, is offensive if black people say it to whites. (i.e. “sup mah nilla?”) Mocking the fact that its offensive to blacks when whites say nigger. Reference to the coloring of vanilla flavored foods.

The brim of a cowboy’s hat would make an odd suntan across his face. The bottom half would be tanned dark, while the top half remained pale because it was shaded by the brim. The Native American sign for a white person was wiping the index finger across their own face along the bridge of the nose, indicating the border between dark and light skin on a cowboy’s face. They came to call the white men “pale faces”.

Used by Hispanics against White Women that like Black Men. Comes from the word Petrolio or Petrolium in Spanish. Indicates that these women like Petrolium because them men they date are black like petrolium

All white people come from Europe, they claim to be American, but they are not, they are pilgrims. It’s a racist term because when white people realize the truth, whatever pride they have in being American will be crushed. This term is mostly used by Mexicans and Native Americans, which happen to be the real Americans, not whites.

Previously referred only to the rural prejudice whites, mostly farmers, who have reddish necks (or a “farmer’s tan”). However, its usage has become a lot looser and now includes any racist white. See: Peckerwood

Whites who try to act Japanese. Defined as those who are obsessed with Japanese culture, including but not limited to: frequently watching/reading and having an expansive knowledge of anime and manga, frequently listening to j-pop, wanting to learn Japanese, playing copious amounts of bemani and RPGS (or just imported Japanese games), collecting Japanese merchandise, driving a rice burner, and wishing to visit frequently or even live in Japan.

Used when Native Americans and Blacks describing Whites whom they see as hurting them many times in present and past and represent an ongoing unhealed open wound, also wounds are often pink in color (the open sore) so it represents the color of many whites who look pink

During 2005, the imageboard 4chan experienced an increase in the usage of the derogatory slur “Wapanese”. The moderators then used a word-filter, replacing every instance of Wapanese with “Weeaboo” which was a fabricated term originally coined by Nicholas Gurewitch in his Perry Bible Fellowship comic strip. Since then, paradoxically, the term was embraced and has become so popular as to transcend outside its indigenous sub-culture into mainstream. Since Weeaboo is an exact synonym of Wapanese, its usage is exactly the same. That is, it is used to describe a white person who is obssesed with japanese culture. This of course, would include manga and anime.

End presidential term limits

By Jonathan Zimmerman, Published: November 28

Jonathan Zimmerman is a professor of history and education at New York University. His books include “Small Wonder: The Little Red Schoolhouse in History and Memory.”

In 1947, Sen. Harley Kilgore (D-W.Va.) condemned a proposed constitutional amendment that would restrict presidents to two terms. “The executive’s effectiveness will be seriously impaired,” Kilgore argued on the Senate floor, “ as no one will obey and respect him if he knows that the executive cannot run again.”

Or consider the reaction to the Iran nuclear deal. Regardless of his political approval ratings, Obama could expect Republican senators such as Lindsey Graham (S.C.) and John McCain (Ariz.) to attack the agreement. But if Obama could run again, would he be facing such fervent objections from Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Robert Menendez (D-N.J.)?

Probably not. Democratic lawmakers would worry about provoking the wrath of a president who could be reelected. Thanks to term limits, though, they’ve got little to fear.

Nor does Obama have to fear the voters, which might be the scariest problem of all. If he chooses, he could simply ignore their will. And if the people wanted him to serve another term, why shouldn’t they be allowed to award him one?

That was the argument of our first president, who is often held up as the father of term limits. In fact, George Washington opposed them. “I can see no propriety in precluding ourselves from the service of any man who, in some great emergency, shall be deemed universally most capable of serving the public,” Washington wrote in a much-quoted letter to the Marquis de Lafayette.

Washington stepped down after two terms, establishing a pattern that would stand for more than a century. But he made clear that he was doing so because the young republic was on solid footing, not because his service should be limited in any way.

The first president to openly challenge the two-term tradition was Theodore Roosevelt, who ran for a third term as president in 1912 on the Bull Moose ticket. When he stepped down in 1908, Roosevelt pledged not to seek a third term; reminded of this promise in 1912, he said that he had meant he would not seek a “third consecutive term.” The New York Times called Roosevelt’s explanation a “pitiful sophistication,” and the voters sent Woodrow Wilson to the White House.

Only in 1940, amid what George Washington might have called a “great emergency,” did a president successfully stand for a third term. Citing the outbreak of war overseas and the Depression at home, Democrats renominated Franklin D. Roosevelt. They pegged him for a fourth time in 1944 despite his health problems, which were serious enough to send him to his grave the following year.

To Republicans, these developments echoed the fascist trends enveloping Europe. “You will be serving under an American totalitarian government before the long third term is finished,” warned Wendell Wilkie, Roosevelt’s opponent in 1940. Once the two-term tradition was broken, Wilkie added, nobody could put it back together. “If this principle dies, it will be dead forever,” he said.

That’s why the GOP moved to codify it in the Constitution in 1947, when a large Republican majority took over Congress. Ratified by the states in 1951, the 22nd Amendment was an “undisguised slap at the memory of Franklin D. Roosevelt,” wrote Clinton Rossiter, one of the era’s leading political scientists. It also reflected “a shocking lack of faith in the common sense and good judgment of the people,” Rossiter said.

He was right. Every Republican in Congress voted for the amendment, while its handful of Democratic supporters were mostly legislators who had broken with FDR and his New Deal. When they succeeded in limiting the presidency to two terms, they limited democracy itself.

“I think our people are to be safely trusted with their own destiny,” Sen. Claude Pepper (D-Fla.) argued in 1947. “We do not need to protect the American people with a prohibition against a president whom they do not wish to elect; and if they wanted to elect him, have we the right to deny them the power?”

It’s time to put that power back where it belongs. When Ronald Reagan was serving his second term, some Republicans briefly floated the idea of removing term limits so he could run again. The effort went nowhere, but it was right on principle. Barack Obama should be allowed to stand for re election just as citizens should be allowed to vote for — or against — him. Anything less diminishes our leaders and ourselves.

Read more about this issue: Thomas E. Mann: Want to end partisan politics? Here’s what won’t work, and what will Robert J. Samuelson: Why we no longer trust government Letter: After shutdown debacle, it’s time for term limits Zachary A. Goldfarb: How we misread the numbers that dominate our politics

Nancy Pelosi still insists that Obamacare will improve the lives of average Americans, despite over 20 reports indicating otherwise.

“Because of the law, in the coming months Americans will have expanded choices and more affordable care.” Pelosi said at a recent Capitol Hill briefing. “We will be enhancing patients’ rights, putting money back in the pockets of consumers, reducing costs and strengthening the economic, financial, and health security of working families.”

She goes further to say that Obamacare will even lower the nation’s debt.

“The Affordable Care Act is bringing the cost of health care in our country down in both the public and private sector,” said Pelosi. “And that is what is largely responsible for the deficit coming down.”

But what she doesn’t realize is that her numbers are flawed.

“Despite promises that the law will lower costs, [Obamacare] will in fact cause the premiums of many Americans to spike substantially,” a report released by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce concluded. “The broken promises are numerous, and the data reveals that many Americans, from recent college graduates to older adults, will not be able to afford the law’s higher costs.”

The report is based on responses from 17 insurance companies to a letter from Congress asking them to estimate the effects Obamacare would have on premiums and found that individuals in about 90% of all states would likely face “significant premium increases.”

Furthermore, the committee found that some individuals may see premium increases up to 413%.

Editor’s Note: How much extra will you have to pay? To see how much Obamacare will take from your paycheck next year, go here.

On top of higher premiums, Obamacare will create no fewer than twenty new taxes or tax hikes on the American people.

Most of the new taxes go into effect January 1, 2014, but they are already infuriating millions of Americans.

The Obama administration has even given the IRS an extra $500 million to enforce the rules and regulations of Obamacare.

The new taxes don’t bode well for middle-class Americans. Incomes for the rich have soared this decade but middle class workers have seen their wages stagnate and even drop since the 2008 Great Recession.

Many fear Obamacare with its high insurance costs and new taxes, could provide the middle class a fatal blow.

Of course, the Obamacare plan was primarily designed to decrease the number of uninsured Americans and reduce healthcare costs.

Experts are saying it will have the exact opposite effect. In fact, it’s estimated that Obamacare will cost the average taxpayer nearly $6,000 in extra taxes as early as next year.

A McKinsey report now estimates Obamacare will cost taxpayers at least an additional $400 billion more than originally proposed.

And another study done by the Congressional Budget Office estimates that Obamacare won’t actually expand coverage and that the number of uninsured under Obamacare won’t ever fall below 30 million.

Perhaps worse than anything, is that millions of Americans will now lose their full-time jobs.

That’s a big reason why close to two-thirds of the country do not approve of Obamacare, according to recent polls.

Many are still furious over how the Democratically-controlled Congress passed this bill, which many scholars deem unconstitutional.

“Bipartisanship is a two-way street,” Pelosi said before Congress voted on the law. “A bill can be bipartisan without bipartisan votes…We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.”

If Congress had read the bill before passing it they should have noticed one section of the law that says you could get slapped with a $2,000 fine for not having health insurance – even if you do actually have it.

Or another section that says that under Obamacare ordinary Americans will get stuck paying for substance abuse coverage even if they never touched a drink or drug in their life.

Can the U.S. government really put you in jail for not buying health insurance?Go here to see the shocking story.

With the implementation of Obamacare quickly approaching, millions of Americans are asking what they can do to prepare for all the new costs and rules.

One expert, Betsy McCaughey, former Lieutenant Governor of New York and constitutional scholar with a Ph.D. from Columbia University, recently wrote a best-selling book showing Americans how they can survive Obamacare.

McCaughey is one of the only people in the country — including members of Congress – who has actually read the entire 2,572 page law.

Her book, titled Beating Obamacare: Your Handbook for Surviving the New Health Care Lawbreaks down the complicated bill into 168 pages of actionable advice.

The book, written in an easy going, easy to read style, examines the implications of Obamacare not seen in the mainstream press.

“Section 1501 of Obamacare requires nearly everyone to enroll in a one-size fits all, government-designed health insurance plan. For the first time in history, this law empowers the federal government to control how doctors treat privately insured patients,” McCaughey writes. “So even if you have your own private health plan that you paid for yourself, the government will have say over your care.”

She says that higher costs are only one negative of Obamacare. Doctors, nurses and other hospital employees will suffer from the government’s interference in healthcare. This will trickle down to poorer patient care.

What’s more, one third of all U.S. employers could stop offering health insurance to their workers, says McCaughey.

In fact, corporations including GE, IBM, and Time Warner have already said they will stop providing insurance for hundreds of thousands of employees.

McCaughey also exposes several sections of the bill that empower Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius to dictate what doctors can and cannot do.

“Section 4104(a), empowers Sebelius to reduce preventive services for seniors based on the recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force,” McCaughey notes. “This is the panel that said women ages forty to forty-nine and older than seventy-four should no longer get routine mammograms.”

And according to McCaughey’s research, senior citizens will get hit the hardest from Obamacare. “If you’re a senior or a baby boomer, expect less care than in the past,” she says. “Hip and knee replacements and cataract surgery will be especially hard to get from Medicare in the months ahead.”

She warns seniors to get some of those types of procedures done now before Obamacare goes into full effect, as Obamacare awards bonus points to hospitals that spend the least on seniors.

Lastly, many will find it difficult to keep their medical records private, according to McCaughey.

“The law will compel Americans to share with millions of strangers who are not physicians confidential private and personal medical history information they do not wish to share”

Editor’s Note: Real facts and figures about the hidden Obamacare taxes and fees and how they will affect everyday Americans and seniors are hard to find. As a courtesy, Money Morning is giving readers a free copy of Betsy McCaughey’s new book Beating Obamacare: Your Handbook for Surviving The New Health Care Law. But only a limited number of copies are available. Please go here to reserve yours today.

HHS Public Affairs Contacts

If you are a reporter looking for information about the Affordable Care Act and the Health Insurance Marketplaces:

First try the All Topics section on HealthCare.gov, which has comprehensive information about the Health Insurance Marketplace here.

Email our media team here. If you have already contacted CMS’ media relations team, then HHS already has your request, and there is no need to email both agencies. Please be as specific as possible about your request and deadline.

WHY pay $200 for an abortion when you can just use a trash can??? Don’t be to hard on this teen in the very near future your kids or grand kids that survive the dumpster will have to make a choice to comply with the Liberal Death Culture laws like China’s One-Child Policy or not. OH whats that you SAY that won’t happen here… really? Kermit Gosnell was found guilty of murdering three babies born alive during failed abortions by “snipping” their spinal cords. His former employees alleged that “hundreds” of babies were killed in this way.

Today the body of a baby was discovered in the bag of a 17-year-old teen suspected of shoplifting at a Victoria’s Secret store in Manhatten. People are rightly shocked by this event.

However, what if I told you that this sort of thing is happening routinely, all across the country, as well as in other parts of the world? And that the only reason that it’s making national headlines this time is because the discovery of the baby’s body was at a Victoria Secret store, which gives the story that extra bizarre twist, with just a hint of weird sexuality, that will grab attention?

Take a look at the following list…which is far from complete. I’ve simply compiled some of the most shocking, and most recent incidents.

China’s “sewer baby” was flushed down a toilet, before becoming stuck in a sewage pipe. The baby was rescued by firefighters.

Here are the incidents in just the past eight months or so:

October 17 – A 17-year-old girl is stopped at a Victoria’s Secret store in Manhatten for suspected shoplifting, and admits that in her bag she has the body of a baby that she gave birth to the day previous.

October 11 – A newborn baby is found, bleeding but alive, with part of his umbilical cord still attached, abandoned on the concrete in the back yard of a house in Queen’s, New York. The baby survived.

September 19 – The body of a baby is found at a garbage dump in West Yorkshire, in the United Kingdom.

August 28 – A woman gives birth in a bar bathroom in Pennsylvania, stuffs the baby in the water tank of a toilet, and then returns to the bar to watch a fight on TV. The body was subsequently discovered by the bar owner.

August 7 – The body of a baby is discovered at hospital rest room in Texas.

June 20 – An Iraqi-born UK woman is found guilty of causing grievous bodily harm after stuffing her baby in a garbage bag and throwing her down a 44 ft. garbage chute.

June 14 – A garbage truck driver in Thailand sees a small hand emerge from a garbage bag during a pickup. The baby had a balloon tied around her throat.

June 12 – Brittany Cole is arrested in Altheimer, Arkansas, after dumping her infant son in the trash can. She reportedly told police that she was tired of caring for the baby and could no longer do so.

June 5 – Twenty-seven-year-old Virginia resident Shavaughn Robinson is charged after allegedly giving birth in a toilet, then placing her daughter in a trash can, and then taking the garbage bag with the baby in it out of the can and tossing it in a dumpster.

June 4 – A dog discovers a living baby in Thailand that had been placed in a white plastic bag in a dump. The baby, which was premature, survived.

May 30 – Police announce that charges will not be filed against a Kansas teen who gave birth and dumped the body of her baby in a trash can. The teen claimed the baby was stillborn.

May 27 – Video footage of firefighters in Jinhua, China, rescuing a baby who had become stuck in a sewage pipe, rockets around the globe. The baby’s mother apparently gave birth on the toilet, and by her own account “accidentally” flushed the baby down the toilet. The mom reportedly hid the pregnancy because the baby was not considered legal under China’s brutal One-Child Policy.

May 2 – Cherlie Lafleur, 19, is arrested in Pennsylvania after allegedly attempting to flush her newborn baby down the toilet at her school. When that didn’t work, she reportedly deposited the body in the trash can.

Dec. 10, 2012 – The body of a newborn baby is discovered on the conveyor belt of a garbage sorting facility in La Puente, California.

I’ve been working in the news business for nearly 10 years, and I can’t ever recall a similar string of incidents. Recently, to help keep all these disturbing stories organized on our website we even had to come up with a tag, the macabre, but sadly necessary “toilet births.”

“It was the Christians who saved [these babies] and transformed those cultures from cultures of death into cultures of life,” wrote Deacon Keith Fournier.

However, he said, the rise of the abortion culture seems to be bringing the custom back in an unofficial form, with numerous gruesome stories emerging in recent months of parents unceremoniously discarding their newborn children.

“These contemporary examples substitute a trash can or a dumpster for the rock,” Fournier wrote.

But, he said, this trend isn’t surprising, since “babies are treated as trash” in abortion clinics across the country.

It’s hard to argue with that logic. Take a look at these other recent incidents:

May 28, 2013 – Report surfaces from China about how Chinese officials forcibly aborted a mother who was 8-months pregnant, literally “yanking” her baby out of her, and then dumping it in the trash can.

May 14, 2013 – Three former workers at a Texas abortion clinic run by abortionist Douglas Karpen step forward alleging that babies are routinely murdered after being born alive during failed late-term abortions at Karpen’s clinic. One of Karpen’s former assistants said the abortionist would even “twist” the babies heads off.

May 13 – Kermit Gosnell is found guilty of murdering three babies born alive during failed abortions by “snipping” their spinal cords. His former employees alleged that “hundreds” of babies were killed in this way. In some cases their dismembered feet were kept in jars, or their bodies stuffed into plastic containers and stored in the clinic freezer.

May 8, 2013 – Live Action release undercover footage of renowned late-term abortionist Leroy Carhart telling a woman seeking an abortion that after he kills the baby in her womb, it will soften up like “meat in a crock pot,” before the body of the baby is removed three days later.

April 29, 2013 – Live Action releases undercover footage of a worker at a late-term abortion facility telling a woman seeking an abortion to just “flush it” if the baby is accidentally born alive during the abortion. “If it comes out, then it comes out. Flush it…if anything, you know, put it in a bag or something or somewhere and bring it to us,” the counselor says.

April 19, 2013 – A former employee of late-term abortionist Kermit Gosnell testfies in court how on one occasion a fully formed baby was born alive into a toilet. Kareema Cross said the baby was making “swimming motions” as if it was trying to get out. Another of Gosnell’s employees, Adrienne Moton, then took the baby out of the toilet, and slit its spinal cord.

And this only touches the surface of similarly macabre stories that have come out of the abortion industry. The Gosnell case alone provided hundreds of pages of nausea-inducing stories of living newborn babies crying, squirming and swimming before being brutally murdered and then dumped in the trash can, or ground up in the clinic’s garbage disposal.

While Gosnell was found guilty because he murdered the babies after they were born, it’s clear that his crimes stemmed directly from the abortionist’s mentality. In many cases if he had killed the babies minutes earlier, it would have been perfectly legal, or, at worst, a violation of the state’s 24-week cut off. To him there was little difference between killing them before or after birth. And is that really all that surprising?

Recently, former Seattle City Council member Judy Nicastro wrote an article in the New York Times touting her abortion of her son at 23 weeks, saying that she was “grateful” that the late-term abortion let her son die “in a warm and loving place.” In the article she describes, as if it were a beautifully emotional moment, how, “I felt my son’s budding life end as a doctor inserted a needle through my belly into his tiny heart.”

Pro-life activists tend to believe that if they convince someone that the unborn child is human and alive, then they will be against abortion. But Nicastro had no doubt that that what happend during her abortion was that the abortionist killed her living son. Not a fetus, but her son. And she is “grateful” for that, and thinks it was a beautiful thing, the right thing to do.

So why are there so many stories emerging of moms or others dumping their babies into toilets or trash cans? Could it possibly be the fact that our politicians, our doctors, and our laws, all agree that killing babies and treating them like trash is acceptable, and a critical part of a “free” society? And if so, should we really be surprised when people behave as if that’s actually true?

Former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin was sued Friday in federal court by a New Jersey-area newspaper publisher for alleged copyright infringement over her use of a 9/11 photograph.

The lawsuit was filed in Manhattan federal court by North Jersey Media Group Inc., according to the Associated Press.

HOUSTON, TX – MAY 03: Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin waves before speaking during the 2013 NRA Annual Meeting and Exhibits at the George R. Brown Convention Center on May 3, 2013 in Houston, Texas. More than 70,000 peope are expected to attend the NRA’s 3-day annual meeting that features nearly 550 exhibitors, gun trade show and a political rally. The Show runs from May 3-5. (Credit: Getty Images)

The publisher is accusing Palin’s SarahPac of posting a copy of an iconic September 11 photo on her website and Facebook page without their explicit permission.

Click here to see the photo at the center of the controversy

The photo shows three New York City firefighters raising an American flag over the rubble left in the wake of the World Trade Center attacks.

North Jersey Media Group Inc. is demanding Palin stop using the image and is seeking damages.

Share this:

Like this:

In New York it may soon be an illegal, jail able, felony offense to annoy a cop. OK, so what is annoying: <their constant complaining annoys us>… sure that would “annoy ” a cop but should you go to jail for that? If you spend some time on YouTube you can find thousands of videos of asses trying to annoy cops with stupid stunts to get some point across and while we all find that annoying it’s anything but illegal. Those of us that pay attention have seen the fight over OUR right to film cops and other government officials while “on duty” , and yes, they tried to fight back with “wire tapping laws” but even the most insane courts found that we have a right to film. I’m sure under this new law, that if passed will spread like a wild fire to other states, cops will find that being filmed is very irksome.

Bothering a Cop can be really easy again see YouTube not all the videos are asses most are good people pulling out a cell phone to catch a cop abusing power and squishing rights. You’ll see cops grabbing phones with out warrants, arresting or detaining people for no real reason other than the cop is “annoyed” at being filmed doing something wrong.

Excuse me officer will you stop beating that man you have cuffed on the ground? Hay! you can’t just walk in to my house and take my kid! Will you stop harassing me and go catch some real criminals like drug dealing rapist murders?

All these questions and more, in fact any question, put to a cop could get YOU jailed for up to four years under this law, if the cop you’re asking finds them annoying. If this is the case then it IS the END of FREE SPEECH.